PARENTS OUTRAGED: Second-grade teacher reads "modern fairy tale" to class on homosexual romance and marriage. The story centers around a young prince who must marry before becoming King. Uninterested in the most beautiful young girls in the kingdom, the prince falls in love with and marries his best friend. Settling into a same sex marriage.
LEXINGTON, MA - Lexington public school officials have told Rob and Robin Wirthlin that since "gay marriage is legal" they may describe homosexual relationships to their son in second grade, without notice, and that parents may not opt their child out of such discussions. The Wirthlins were livid.
Teacher tells parents that theme of day was "weddings" and that gay marriage is legal - "I want to present all points of view." No notice given.
Principal tells parents (1) they cannot opt out (2) there will be no parental notification despite state law and (3) "I will not guarantee that something like this won't happen again".Superintendent and School Board Chairman tell TV reporters they agree with decision.
Teacher attended GLSEN presentation promoting homosexuality in classroom. David Parker makes statement.
Son comes home with bizarre story. On March 24, their second-grade son came home from the Estabrook Elementary School and repeated to his mother the story read to him earlier that day about men getting married to each other. His teacher had read the book "King and King" to the class, in which a prince doesn't want to marry any princesses, but instead falls in love with a princess's brother and marries him in a big palace wedding. Mrs. Wirthlin remembers that it was so startling to her son that he described details of the book such as that "the queen even shed a tear." It obviously made an impression on him.
5 comments:
notice is critical. opting out must be mandatory and pulling your kids in a situation like this would be luminous. i bet if the families that objected pulled their kids, they wouldn't get past the door before all of these intrusive decisions were rescinded.
As Dina says: "NMK"
(Not My Kid)
and at the end of the day that is all we can really regulate; our kids.
but if enough people did it in a certain direction the wind would shift.
That's right Jasai. We can only regulate our own kids.
It would be nice if those that determine policy, write school books and lobby the government would not try so hard to recreate our kids to suit their needs.
Showing 7 year old children pictures of men kissing on the mouth is an assault.
-
Only reinforces the destructive nature of the public school system. I read shit like this and am more convinced that I'm going to end up homeschooling my future kids.
But I pose the same question that I asked on thestateof yesterday - why the objection when the State insists your 7-year-old read gay stories, but there is no objection to the more subtle and destructive lessons in false history, glorification of war and colonization, which reinforces the commoditization of people. Why are some forms of propaganda okay and others objectionable? If parents are willing to accept the State's supremity in inculcating values to their children, then they must accept the good with the bad.
Post a Comment